Recently, Parliament passed a Bill to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court from 30 to 33 (excluding the Chief Justice of India). The Bill was introduced in view of increasing pendency of cases in the Supreme Court.
According to the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), a government platform monitoring judicial data, backlog of cases in district courts saw a sharp increase of 18.2 per cent between December 31, 2019 and December 31, 2020.
The total sanctioned strength in the 25 High Courts is 1,080. However, the present working strength is 661 with 419 vacancies as of March 1,2021. The SC highlighted this as one of the reasons for the pendency of cases in the Judiciary. The pendency of cases in the Judiciary is a long pending issue.
In the previous year, 2018-2019, the increase was 7.79 per cent and in 2017-2018 it increased 11.6 per cent.
In the 25 high courts across the country, pendency of cases in 2019-2020 increased 20.4 per cent. In the previous year, in 2018-2019, it increased only 5.29 per cent. In the Supreme Court, pendency rose 10.35 per cent from 60,469 cases on March 1, 2020 to 66,727 on March 1, 2021.
The increase is the highest at least since 2013 when the Supreme Court began making monthly pendency data publicly available. In absolute terms, a backlog of 66,727 cases is the highest that the top court has ever had.
The pendency of cases is a matter of concern in India. The number of cases pending before the court has been on the increase. There are various reasons exist for Pendency of cases, some of tem are-
Increase in the number of cases: Ever since the number of cases in high courts and subordinate judiciary started to grow, the term pendency of cases has been in vogue. An improvement in literacy levels, population growth and formulation of citizen-friendly tools like PIL have resulted in a huge influx of cases in courts.
Insufficient infrastructure: The pendency is mainly due to insufficient infrastructure, shortage of resources and the large volume of cases being filed for various matters.
Rising Vacancies: The courts are working below their sanctioned strength. As of 2017, High Courts have 403 vacancies out of sanctioned strength of 1,079 judges. But still, there are no filling of vacancies. Similarly, subordinate courts have 5,676 vacancies against a sanctioned strength of 22,704 judges. The delay in appointments is increasing vacancies.
Rigid Procedural Requirements: A lot of paperwork needs to be done on every case which sometimes creates unnecessary delays.
Poor Conduct of Lawyers: They are sometimes found indulging in collusive corruption especially at subordinate levels in order to drag the case. Moreover, the lawyers also demand frequent adjournments for not valid reasons.
Inefficiencies by Police Personnel: They are sometimes seen complacent in filing charge sheets and conducting speedy investigation which creates a delay in delivering timely judgement.
The pendency of cases in the courts is an eyesore and has been a perennial problem for many decades. Some major impacts of Pendency of cases are-
The burden on Judges: It disables judges from giving close and full attention to judicial activities, and creates an excessive pressure on the judges' time, since they are compelled to dispose of an inordinately large number of cases within an impractically short period of time.
Overcrowding of Prisons: Pendency is the period that is required to complete the procedure of a case. It is essential that justice or punishment must be given to a criminal as soon as possible. Pendency enhances the number of undertrials in the prisons which eventually leads to overcrowding. According to the NCRB data, In 2019 there were 4.78lakh prisoners. Out of which 69.05 % were undertrials.
Undermines Right to life: The right to speedy trial is a well-established feature of modern criminal jurisprudence. The pendency of cases not only affects the chances of successful prosecution, it seriously impairs the right of liberty and freedom guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.
Harassment of people: The pendency causes harassment of the accused and victim. As they need to go through significant financial, physical and mental stress for years due to the pendency.
Undermines Judicial Credibility: It undermines the faith of the general public in the judicial system and administration of justice, if the cases are not decided within a reasonable time. The pendency of cases implicates in discrimination against litigants and dilutes the power of Rule of Law.
Unsatisfactory Disposal rate: The pendency of cases is a major problem facing the Indian judicial system. The graphic above shows the status of cases in various courts over a period of time. One of the major problems is the lack of number of judges to fasten the disposal rate.
